Birth control is the one sin for which the penalty is national
death, race death; a sin for which there is no atonement.

Theodore Roosevelt.[1]

Anti-Life Philosophy.

I suggest to you that, for the individual, the role of abortion
will be, as it has been, the second line of defense against harmful
pregnancy and the unwanted child. These are contraceptive failures.
The societal role will require that we see family planning in a true
light: No matter how thin you slice it, ladies and gentlemen, family
planning is a euphemism. We don't intend or desire to prevent
conception for conception's sake; we want to prevent conception
because of what follows conception. Family planning is the prevention
of births, and as birth is the end of a sequence which begins with the
sexual urge, then family planning is anti-conception, anti-nidation,
and the termination of the conceptus if implanted. This is the
societal role of abortion in the future.

Professor Irvin Cushner of the Johns Hopkins
School of Medicine.[2]

Introduction.

Do you believe that you have the right to choose your method of
birth control with advice from your doctor? ... If you answered YES to
[this] question, you are pro-choice.

National Abortion Rights Action League.[3]

The First Step.

Why should a Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia include
information on contraception?

Because contraception, by its very definition, seeks to prevent life.
Although its morality is rarely ever discussed any more, even among
Christians, it remains one of the major life issues of our time perhaps
even more preeminent than abortion.

The use of artificial contraception has been called "copulation
without population" and "the formula by which one plus one
equals zero."

Euthanasia has never been possible without the widespread acceptance
of abortion, and abortion has never been possible without a public
acceptance of artificial contraception.

Until 1930, every mainline Protestant church opposed both
contraception and abortion. After the Anglicans accepted contraception
in their Resolution 15, resistance to all kinds of anti-life practices
crumpled quickly, to include abortion, divorce, euthanasia, and
pornography.

Before any of the churches accepted abortion, they accepted
artificial contraception. Today, the only churches that actively oppose
abortion are those that have maintained the Christian tradition against
birth control.

Therefore, it can be said that the advent of contraception was the
very first step down the bioethical 'slippery slope' for this nation and
for the world.

Definitions.

Chapters 98 through 104 examine all of the major artificial methods
of contraception. In order to gain a clear understanding of this topic,
two definitions should be explained and contrasted at this time.

Contraception means the prevention of the union of the sperm and
egg, or the prevention of ovulation. In other words, it prevents, by
some physical mechanism, the creation of a new individual.

On the other hand, as its name implies, birth control prevents
the birth of an already-conceived individual, whether that
individual is only hours past conception or only hours before birth.

Therefore, by definition, abortion is the only true
birth control, and all birth control is truly abortion!

So the use of condoms and other barrier methods would be classified
as conception control, or contraception. The new birth control pills,
Depo-Provera, NORPLANT, the abortion pills, and all intra-uterine
devices (IUDs) would be classified as abortifacient birth control
methods.

Pro-Lifers and Birth Control.

Many pro-life activists will certainly be offended by the
classification of artificial contraception as "anti-life,"
because these people have completely separated contraception from
abortion in their minds. As far as they are concerned, abortion and
artificial contraception are two entirely separate issues.

Many pro-life activists use artificial contraception. In fact, it is
safe to say that many pro-life women use 'birth control' methods that
are actually abortifacient in their methods of operation. These men and
women may not want to hear that they may be committing one or more
'silent' abortions themselves every year, but it would not be
intellectually or ethically honest to obscure or omit the truth in this
matter. It is ironic in the extreme that a 'pro-life' woman who uses an
IUD or the Pill for a decade will commit ten to twenty 'silent'
abortions, while a pro-abortion woman using the same methods may only
commit only one or two additional abortions through surgical means.

There can no longer be any doubt that contraception and abortion are
intimately connected. Indeed, their users share identical
philosophies and purposes.

The Myriad Connections.

The fear of life is the favorite disease of the twentieth century.

William Lyon Phelps.

The Heart of the Matter.

For more than 1,900 years, Christian teaching was monolithic
regarding the matter of contraception. There was no question and no
dissent on this matter. Up until about 1930, a person who used
artificial contraception methods was considered to be disreputable and
'loose.'

All of this changed in a few very short years. In 1930, the
Anglican's Lambeth Conference approved of the use of contraceptives for
just the "hard cases." This was the gravest possible wound to
the teaching authority of the Church; today, the only major Christian
church still officially 'holding out' against artificial contraception
is the Roman Catholic Church and most of its members ignore its
teachings on this subject and use contraception anyway.

Non-Christians Speak.

Curiously, non-Christians tended to speak out most eloquently against
artificial contraception before the 'Sexual Revolution' rendered it a
dead issue.

Humanist psychologist Sigmund Freud, in a lecture entitled "The
Sexual Life of Human Beings," got to the core of the matter when he
pointed out that the separation of procreation and sexual activity is
the most basic of perversions, and that all sexual perversions are
rooted in this philosophy;

The abandonment of the reproductive function is the common feature
of all perversions. We actually describe a sexual activity as perverse
if it has given up the aim of reproduction and pursues the attainment
of pleasure as an aim independent of it. So, as you will see, the
breach and turning point in the development of sexual life lies in
becoming subordinate to the purpose of reproduction. Everything that
happens before this turn of events and equally everything that
disregards it and that aims solely at obtaining pleasure is given the
uncomplimentary name of "perverse" and as such is
proscribed.[4]

Artificial methods [of contraception] are like putting a premium on
vice. They make men and women reckless ... Nature is relentless and
will have full revenge for any such violation of her laws. Moral
results can only be produced by moral restraints. All other restraints
defeat the very purpose for which they are intended. If artificial
[birth control] methods become the order of the day, nothing but moral
degradation can be the result. A society that has already become
enervated through a variety of causes will still become further
enervated by the adoption of artificial [birth control] methods ... As
it is, man has sufficiently degraded women for his lust, and
artificial [birth control] methods, no matter how well-meaning the
advocates may be, will still further degrade her.[5]

Indistinguishable Natures.

Contraception cannot be separated from abortion. In fact, anyone who
debates on the topic of abortion will inevitably be drawn to the topic
of artificial contraception over and over again, especially in the post-Roe
era of pro-life activism. Therefore, every pro-life activist should
understand the many relationships between abortion and artificial
contraception.

How does contraception lead to abortion? Quite simply, they are virtually
indistinguishable in a psychological, physical, and legal sense, as
shown in the following paragraphs.

The Anti-Life Psychology.

Those individuals who use artificial contraception take the critical
step of separating sex from procreation. Contraception not abortion
was the first step down the slippery slope. When contraception doesn't
work, people think of the resulting child as a 'failure,' not an
intrinsically precious gift from God. One of the most convincing
arguments for abortion is that it is necessary as a backup to
contraception.

One of the prime groups agitating for looser and looser abortion
regulations is the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), which
contends that abortion is a necessary "backstop" to artificial
contraception; "Of course contraceptives should be more widely
available and promoted; however, in the present state of contraceptive
technology, and given the continuing possibility of human error in the
use of even the best methods, abortion is needed as a backstop; its use
is not preferable to contraception, but once a pregnancy occurs, it is
the only means of birth prevention."[6]

Abortifacients.

Many of the most popular methods of artificial contraception
including most of the new birth control Pills and all IUDs are actually
abortifacients. In fact, there are probably five 'silent' abortions
committed unknowingly by women who use these pills and devices for every
single surgical abortion performed in this country.

The pro-abortionists are now in a defensive posture. They are trying
to draw a strong connection between artificial contraception and
abortion. They are attempting to convince the public that, if abortion
is criminalized, artificial contraception will soon follow.

For example, a hysterical tirade by Faye Wattleton, the former
president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, makes this
allegation;

Step by horrifying step, our government is commandeering control of
our bodies, our reproduction, our most private choices. Unless we act
now, this dangerous trend won't stop at abortion. It won't even stop
at eliminating contraception. Compulsory pregnancy, forced caesareans,
surveillance and detention of pregnant women these are the chilling,
logical outcome of laws that reduce women to instruments of the
state.[7]

And Frank Susman, the pro-abortion lawyer who argued the anti-life
side in the Supreme Court's 1989 Webster v. Reproductive Health
Services case, stated in his opening argument that the 'rights' of
abortion and contraception actually merge;

For better or for worse, there no longer exists any bright line
between the fundamental right that was established in Griswold
[contraception], and the fundamental right to abortion that was
established in Roe. These two rights, because of advances in medicine
and science, now overlap. They coalesce and merge and they are not
distinct.

The quest for the perfect birth control has led to a bald
acknowledgement by the pill-pushers that they couldn't care less if
their products are abortifacients. In fact, all of the new 'low-dose'
birth control pills and abortion pills like RU-486 are designed
to cause abortions (see Chapters 31 and 34 of Volume II for further
information on these abortifacients).

The Law.

There is no longer any doubt that the so-called 'right to privacy'
has inexorably led from contraception to abortion to euthanasia. This
principle is applied uniformly by the law. The identical legal
underpinnings of contraception and abortion were recognized soon after
artificial contraception was legalized by the Supreme Court in its Griswold
v. Connecticut decision. W.E. Barnett makes this point perfectly
clear in his book Sexual Freedom and the Constitution;

Despite the emphasis in the Griswold opinion upon protecting
bedroom activities from the prying eyes of the state, it is possible
to discern in the decision a rather different effect. Instead of
cloaking in privacy bedroom activities in general, the decision can be
read as establishing the right of a married couple to decide if and
when they wish to have children, that decision being an integral part
of the marital relationship.

This, of course, is precisely the rationale behind Roe v.
Wade. It is also the logic now being used to justify euthanasia!

Abortion As Contraception.

More than a third of the abortions in this country are obtained by
teenaged girls. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the vast
majority of these girls use abortion as contraception. The
methods of contraception that aborted teenagers used before their
abortions are listed below, along with the percentage of fornicating
teenaged girls who use abortion as birth control.

This means that four out of five teenaged girls who get
abortions use the procedure as birth control!

Artificial Contraception = More Abortions.

It would seem to be counterintuitive that a wider use of artificial
contraception would lead to a great increase in the number of abortions,
since the stated purpose of contraception is to prevent
'unwanted' conceptions that lead to abortion.

However, there are two methods by which a greater general public use
of contraceptives will lead to more, not less abortions;

(1) a greater use of contraceptives will lead to greater
promiscuity and carelessness, because people will rely on abortion as
a handy 'backup;' and

(2) As described in Chapter 99, "The Effectiveness of
Contraception," there are more than two million
contraceptive failures in this country every year. Abortion
statistician Christopher Tietze has said that the lifetime abortion
rate in a country with moderately effective contraception
programs (such as the United States) will be 1,000 per 1,000 women.
This means that the best we can expect in this country is that the
average woman will have at least one abortion during her lifetime.[8]

The two men most 'credited' with developing the birth control pill
now acknowledge that their invention has led to widespread promiscuity.
Dr. Robert Kirstner of Harvard Medical School said that "For years
I thought the pill would not lead to promiscuity, but I've changed my
mind. I think it probably has."[9]

And Dr. Min-Chueh Chang, the other co-developer of the birth control
pill, has acknowledged that "[Young people] indulge in too much
sexual activity ... I personally feel the pill has rather spoiled young
people. It's made them more permissive."[10]

The person most qualified to speak on the relationship of rising
contraceptive use and abortion rates is undoubtedly Malcolm Potts, M.D.,
former medical director of the International Planned Parenthood
Federation, who claimed in 1973 that "As people turn to
contraception, there will be a rise, not a fall, in the abortion
rate."[11]

This view is confirmed by Dr. Judith Bury of Canada's Brook Advisory
Centre, who says that "There is overwhelming evidence that,
contrary to what you might expect, the provision of contraception leads
to an increase in the abortion rate."[12]

Canadian sex educator David Robinson goes even further and states
that "Today abortion is the most widely used birth control method
in the world."[13]

Finally, this country's most often-quoted 'sexologist,' Alfred
Kinsey, said nearly four decades ago that

At the risk of being repetitious, I would remind the group that we
have found the highest frequency of induced abortion in the group
which, in general, most frequently uses contraceptives.

I don't think it is entirely carelessness. As I pointed out before,
you don't do anything putting on your clothes, or going to bed, or
drinking, or eating with absolute regularity. And I think it is just
too much to hope that we can ever have any contraceptive practice,
outside of temporary sterilization, which is going to prevent this
occasional slip that accounts for a high proportion of undesired
pregnancies and abortions, especially among those of the upper
socioeconomic levels.[14]

Indeed, some Neofeminists see no distinction whatever between
artificial contraception and abortion. Kristin Luker, in her
revealingly-entitled book Taking Chances: Abortion and the Decision
Not to Contracept, says that "We would argue that since
abortion has become a primary method of fertility control, it should be
offered and subsidized in exactly the same way that other contraceptive
services are."[15]

And Irene Figa-Talamanca got to the heart of the matter when she
wrote that "Abortion and contraception are not alternatives but
complementary."[16]

The Slippery Slope Began
With Contraception.

In those cases where there is such a clearly felt moral obligation
to limit or avoid parenthood, and where there is a morally sound
reason for avoiding complete abstinence, the Conference agrees that
other [contraceptive] methods may be used, provided that this is done
in the light of the same Christian principles. The Conference records
its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of
conception-control for motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere
convenience.

The Anglican Bishop's Resolution 15 of
August 15, 1930, The Lambeth Conference.

As a Nation.

Our long slide down the slippery slope began in the 1930s with the
introduction and approval of artificial contraception for the
omnipresent 'hard cases.'

Any pro-life activist who denies this is simply kidding himself. Look
to the world for examples; every one of the 148 countries that
have legalized artificial contraception now have abortion to one degree
or another. Once the "contraceptive mentality" has taken root,
abortion naturally follows as an effective and cheap method of
population control. As Malcolm Potts has said, "No society has
controlled its fertility without recourse to a significant number of
abortions. In fact, abortion is often the starting place in the control
of fertility."[11]

There are only a few countries that have not yet been saturated with
the West's "contraceptive imperialism." In these countries,
there is still respect for life. In these few countries, there is still
no abortion (or very few illegal abortions).

Chapter 57 of Volume II, "International Situation,"
contains information on the status of abortion in most of the countries
of the world.

As Individuals.

The progression from artificial contraception to abortion occurs
millions of times yearly on the individual level, as well. If a woman
goes on 'the pill,' NORPLANT, Depo-Provera, or the IUD, she can only be
trying to prevent pregnancy, and so any pregnancy will be viewed as a
failure. If the child she is carrying is saddled with the stigma of
being a failure before it has even seen the light of day, the only
logical manner of dealing with the 'problem' is abortion.

This progression works from parent to child, as well. When children
know or suspect that their parents use contraceptives, they will see
nothing wrong with fornicating themselves. Parents cannot really argue
that their kids should stay away from artificial contraception, because
they (the parents) have already separated sex from procreation
themselves.

[2] Professor Irvin Cushner, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, at the
Symposium on Implementation of Therapeutic Abortion, International
Hotel, Los Angeles, January 22 to 24, 1971. Quoted in the Marriage
and Family Newsletter, July 1971, page 3.

[5] Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in Father A.S. Antonisamy. Wisdom for
All Times: Mahatma Gandhi and Pope Paul VI on Birth Regulation.
Family Life Service Centre, Archbishop's House, Pondicherry 605001
India. June 1978. Quotes are taken from D.G. Tendulkar (Editor). The
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volumes 2 and 4. Published by the
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India.

[13] David Robertson, et al. Sex Education: A Teacher's Guide.
The Canadian Ministry of National Health and Welfare, Volume 4, pages 24
and 25.

[14] Alfred Kinsey, during a presentation at the 1955 conference on
induced abortion held by Planned Parenthood. Quoted in Mary Calderone,
M.D., Medical Director of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America
(editor). Abortion in the United States. New York: Paul B. Hoeber,
Inc., 1956. Page 157.

Gary Atkinson, Ph.D., and Father Albert Moraczewski, Ph.D. A
Moral Evaluation of Contraception and Sterilization: A Dialogical Study.
St. Louis, Missouri: Pope John XXIII Medical-Moral Research and
Education Center, 1979. 115 pages. Reviewed by Donald DeMarco, Ph.D. in
the Summer 1980 issue of the International Review of Natural Family
Planning, pages 166 and 167. This short volume presents the central
arguments of the controversies over contraception and sterilization.

Carl Djerassi. The Politics of Contraception. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1980. Illustrated, 274 pages.
Reviewed by Andrew Hacker in the Summer 1980 issue of the International
Review of Natural Family Planning, pages 179 to 181. This is a
fascinating book purely because it gives us insight into the mind of Dr.
Carl Djerassi, one of the original inventors of the birth control pill.
By reading this book, one can examine the very roots and beginnings of
the anti-life, anti-natalist philosophy.

Greenhaven Press. Science and Technology: Opposing Viewpoints.
Volume I. Greenhaven Press Opposing Viewpoints Series, Post Office
Box 289009, San Diego, California 92128-9009. 1989, 440 pages. Each
section includes several essays by leading authorities on both sides of
each issue: Creationism in the schools, current artificial birth
technologies, genetic engineering, organ transplants, animal
experimentation, and the Strategic Defense Initiative are just a few of
the topics whose main pro- and con arguments are thoroughly covered in
this excellent 440-page volume. This topic is covered by a series of
books, beginning with a basic set of essays entitled Sources and
continuing with an additional and updated annual series of essays. A
catalog is available from the above address and can be obtained by
calling 1-(800) 231-5163.

James W. Knight and Joan C. Callahan. Preventing Birth:
Contemporary Methods and Related Moral Controversies. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1989. 350 pages.
This book pretty thoroughly covers the history, politics, and types of
birth control, some information on human reproductive anatomy and how
the birth control methods work, techniques of abortion and types and
modes of action of various abortifacients, and a short section on the
various issues related to abortion. This is a book that takes the widest
possible view of the abortion debate, sweeping in almost every
tangential issue, and is recommended for those who would like to pursue
the connections between abortion and artificial contraception further.

Charles D. Provan. The Bible and Birth Control. 1989, Paperback, 97 pages. Reviewed by Robert L. Sassone on page 46
of the March 1990 ALL About Issues. Order from Zimmer Press, 410
West Main Street, Monongahela, Pennsylvania 15063, or call (412)
258-7775, or order from American Life League, Post Office Box 1350,
Stafford, Virginia 22554. The Christian case against birth control,
written by a Protestant especially for Protestants.